Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 83.8 | 80.1 |
| Basic Information | |
| Samsung | Samsung |
| -- | Android 8.0 Oreo |
| 2019-03-15 | 2020-04-04 |
| 6.24 x 2.93 x 0.30 inches | 6.24 x 3.18 x 0.56 inches |
| 5.86 ounces | 9.03 ounces |
| Black, Blue, Coral and White | Black |
| Plastic | Plastic |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | -- |
| $ 202.00 | $ 1105.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.4 inches | 5.1 inches |
| 2340 x 1080 pixels | 2560 x 1440 pixels (Quad HD / 2K) |
| Super AMOLED | -- |
| 403 pixels per inch | 576 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 8.9 |
| Performance | |
| Samsung Exynos 7 Octa 9610 chipset | Samsung Exynos 9810 chipset |
| ARM Cortex-A73 and ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2300 MHz) processor | Exynos M3 and ARM Cortex-A55, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2700 MHz) processor |
| 4 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Mali-G72 MP3 GPU | Mali-G72 MP18 GPU |
| 9.27 | 9.45 |
| Storage | |
| 128 GB internal memory | 64 GB internal memory |
| microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot | microSDXC (up to 512 GB) external memory slot |
| 14.14 | 11.74 |
| Camera | |
| 25.00 MP + 25.00 MP | 12.00 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.50 aperture |
| 27.00mm focal length | -- |
| 0.36 inches (1/2.8") sensor | 0.39 inches (1/2.55") sensor |
| 1920 x 1080 (30 fps) (Full HD) video resolution | 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) video resolution |
| 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video | -- |
| 10.12 | 8.14 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 4000mAh Li - Ion Battery | 4500mAh Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Removable Battery |
| 5.92 | 6.32 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| NFC | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
| FM Radio | -- |
Comparison review
The Samsung Galaxy A50 has an overall score of 83.8, which is a bit better than the Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro's overall score of 80.1. The Samsung Galaxy A50 construction is way lighter and notably thinner than Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro, even though it was released a bit more over a year before.
The Samsung Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a little bit better processing power than Samsung Galaxy A50. Both have the same RAM amount and a Octa-Core processor. The Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a little sharper screen than Galaxy A50, because although it has a much smaller display, it also counts with a greater screen pixels density and a better resolution of 1440 x 2560px.
Galaxy A50 has a much better camera than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, because although it has a tinier aperture and a tinier back-facing camera sensor capturing worse quality videos and photographs, and they both have the same 1920x1080 (Full HD) video definition and the same video frame rate, the Galaxy A50 also counts with a much better 25 mega-pixels resolution camera.
Samsung Galaxy A50 has a much better storage for apps and games than Galaxy XCover FieldPro, and although they both have an external memory slot that supports up to 512 GB, the Samsung Galaxy A50 also has 64 GB more internal storage. Galaxy XCover FieldPro features a little longer battery lifetime than Galaxy A50, because it has 4500mAh of battery capacity.
Samsung Galaxy A50 not only is the best devices in our current comparison, but it's also a bargain compared to the other ones, which makes it a great choice.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.